What did Jesus look like? Artists, scholars and millions of Christians around the world have been pondering the question for centuries. And on Tuesday, March 30, at 9/8c, HISTORY viewers may get closer to an answer than ever before, thanks to a special two-hour event.

The Real Face of Jesus? follows a team of graphic experts as they use cutting-edge 3D software to bring a holy relic known as the Shroud of Turin to life. Many believe Jesus Christ was buried in this ancient linen cloth, which bears traces of blood and the faint, ghostly image of a man. With the help of modern technology, can HISTORY finally unlock the secrets of one of the worlds most scrutinized and controversial artifacts?

To attempt this feat, HISTORY turned to computer graphics artist Ray Downing of Studio Macbeth, who used photographs and digital animation to reconstruct Abraham Lincoln in 2009. As Ray and his team grapple with the task, we delve into the Shroud of Turins long history, along with the many perplexing questions that centuries of scientific research have failed to settle. How, for instance, did the figures imprint appear on the cloth? And how can we extract 3D information from a two-dimensional piece of linen?

In The Real Face of Jesus?, HISTORY unveils the fruit of many months of labor, made possible by sophisticated computer tools in very capable hands: an accurate depiction of the man many believe to be Jesus Christ. For the devout and curious alike, this is a compelling story of transformation—a fascinating journey from the realm of creativity and imagination into the domain of science and technology.

“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

I remember a study from at least a decade back in which they did the whole 3-D face of Jesus based on the shroud impressions.

Interestingly, there is a Knight's Templar tale tide to the shroud that I've always found to have more credence than the Catholic contrivance everyone buys into.

According to legend Jacques de Molay (the 23rd and last Grand Master of the Knights Templar (c. 1240/1250 – March 1314 c.e.)was deliberately tortured via "The Stations of the Cross". That is to say that the saintly and pure priests that brutalized him and the other Templars the church betrayed, scourged him, set a crown of thorns on him and ultimately crucified him (being certain to keep him alive during all of this) and even wrapped him in linen, setting him into a tomb for 3 days so as to show him the torments known to Christ who he had betrays... or so the church claimed (what they wouldn't do for a few gold coins)... ultimately de Molay was roasted over a spit on the island center the Seine just in eye shot of Notre Dame (history states that King Philip the fair ordered him to be "burnt at the stake" but his manner of execution in this case, was a slow roasting technique that lasted for upwards of 3 days in some cases... but hey, you've got to love those merciful Christians )

Anywho... the lore around all of this brings us to that shroud used around de Molay... how the timing of his execution fits so snugly with both, the time of the Turin shroud's tangible appearance on the scene as well as the majority of the dating tests done to the cloth... in other words, the perspiration and blood stains might very well be that of Jacques de Molay... but that's just conspiracy radical thinking

I remember a study from at least a decade back in which they did the whole 3-D face of Jesus based on the shroud impressions.

Interestingly, there is a Knight's Templar tale tide to the shroud that I've always found to have more credence than the Catholic contrivance everyone buys into.

According to legend Jacques de Molay (the 23rd and last Grand Master of the Knights Templar (c. 1240/1250 – March 1314 c.e.)was deliberately tortured via "The Stations of the Cross". That is to say that the saintly and pure priests that brutalized him and the other Templars the church betrayed, scourged him, set a crown of thorns on him and ultimately crucified him (being certain to keep him alive during all of this) and even wrapped him in linen, setting him into a tomb for 3 days so as to show him the torments known to Christ who he had betrays... or so the church claimed (what they wouldn't do for a few gold coins)... ultimately de Molay was roasted over a spit on the island center the Seine just in eye shot of Notre Dame (history states that King Philip the fair ordered him to be "burnt at the stake" but his manner of execution in this case, was a slow roasting technique that lasted for upwards of 3 days in some cases... but hey, you've got to love those merciful Christians )

Anywho... the lore around all of this brings us to that shroud used around de Molay... how the timing of his execution fits so snugly with both, the time of the Turin shroud's tangible appearance on the scene as well as the majority of the dating tests done to the cloth... in other words, the perspiration and blood stains might very well be that of Jacques de Molay... but that's just conspiracy radical thinking

Truthfully, I had not heard that story but fittingly, it makes sense. I'll look into that one of these days.

I know, I know. I'm posting in an older thread. Get out the whips, chains and torches! XD! LOL.

No seriously, I wanted to inquire about this history channel special. I honestly hadn't heard about it until now. Does anyone know where I'd be able to catch it? It appears the link provided isn't working. Very odd if you ask me. I'm doing a research paper for my religious studies class and thought that this might be a good reference. If anyone can help me out, it would be super appreciated! By the way, is anyone perhaps thinking of studying chickasaw history? I'm looking for future research paper topics. Just curious! Thanks, everyone! =)

Last edited by NetMarissa on 24 Jul 2011, 06:42, edited 1 time in total.

NetMarissa wrote:I know, I know. I'm posting in an older thread. Get out the whips, chains and torches! XD! LOL.

No seriously, I wanted to inquire about this history channel special. I honestly hadn't heard about it until now. Does anyone know where I'd be able to catch it? It appears the link provided isn't working. Very odd if you ask me. I'm doing a research paper for my religious studies class and thought that this might be a good reference. If anyone can help me out, it would be super appreciated! Thanks, everyone! =)

NetMarissa wrote:I'm doing a research paper for my religious studies class and thought that this might be a good reference. If anyone can help me out, it would be super appreciated! Thanks, everyone! =)

Obviously you can do what you want, and obviously every college professor is different, but most of us would not accept a History Channel reference in a research paper...

NetMarissa wrote:I'm doing a research paper for my religious studies class and thought that this might be a good reference. If anyone can help me out, it would be super appreciated! Thanks, everyone! =)

Obviously you can do what you want, and obviously every college professor is different, but most of us would not accept a History Channel reference in a research paper...

While I can understand one reason as to why that would be, I can't fully wrap my head around such an attitude (no pun intended); a resource and especially a cited and studied resource is a resource nonetheless. Does this go for NatGeo as well?

Ok... I did see some silliness on the Green network this morning about the validity of Vampires, Where (?) Wolves, etc. so I can see why such sources would be questionable at best and yet, depending on how that reference were used it could very well be viable.

Sorry, but it sounds as if certain facets of the education world are still looking down on Television when it comes to being a viable source/resource. I've found tons of very credible material on the History/TLC networks as well as NatGeo (two of my favorite networks I should add). In fact the material found in such programs prompted me to get books and manuscripts mentioned in these articles so I could take a deeper look at things which has included some interesting correspondence with show principles. So I'm quite lost as to why such material would no longer be weighed or even remotely seen as credible now days.

AS TO THE SHROUD. . . I believe it was Lawrence Gardner that brings up the whole Templar connection to the artifact in BLOODLINE OF THE HOLY GRAIL (quite a good read actually).